It's Up to the Anti-War Movement to Attack Blair - The Man Responsible for British Barbarity in Iraq and Radical Islam's Response to ItTwo days ago the suffering, grief and terror that have visited so many innocents in Iraq came to London. We have not paid the kind of price that people have paid in Fallujah, Najaf or Jenin, but it is a steep price nonetheless. And its root causes are the same.
The bomb blasts were grimly predictable. Indeed, they had been widely and repeatedly predicted not least by rank-and-file Londoners, who knew that by taking Britain into Iraq side-by-side with the USA, Tony Blair had placed their city in the firing line.
As I write, the wreckage is being cleared and the casualties counted. But Blair has already appeared on television to address the nation, pledging to defend "our values" and "our way of life" against those who would "impose extremism on the world".
He spoke of the unity of "civilised nations" in resisting "terrorism". While the delivery may be slicker, his "us" vs "them" world-view was indistinguishable from Bush's.
Even by Blair's standards, it was a performance of nauseating hypocrisy, as he sought to seize the moral high ground in relation to violence and destruction that he himself helped unleash.
The Labour government, egged on by the Conservative opposition and the right-wing press, will now seek to play on fear and drum up vindictive feelings.
At this stage, however, it is unclear how the British population will respond. Will the mood more resemble post 9/11 USA or Spain in the wake of the Madrid carnage?
Coming the day after London's Olympic triumph, the attacks are a grim reminder that media-hyped feel-good boosterism will do nothing to mitigate the UK's plummeting global standing.
Blair's closeness to Bush, his championship of the US neo-liberal model in the European Union, his aggressive pursuit of the "war against terror" have all diminished Britain in the eyes of Europe and the world.
This is a reality of which many people in Britain are acutely aware. Opposition to the invasion of Iraq spread across every sector of British society, and was overwhelming in London.
Subsequent revelations concerning the bogus claims about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction have further embittered public opinion and made the Prime Minister, according to every poll, one of the least trusted and most disrespected individuals in the country.
Of course, Blair was able to overcome this decided disadvantage and get himself re-elected in May thanks to the absence of meaningful opposition within the established political system.
That absence will be felt acutely in the days to come as Britain wrestles with the consequences of the bomb blasts.
The Blair government will doubtless seek to use this morning's atrocity to escalate its alarming attacks on civil liberties.
The country's 1.5 million strong Muslim population, already subject to police harassment, will come under increased pressure.
(Commentators have been quick to claim that the bombs may be the work of people hiding anonymously within the "law-abiding Muslim community".)
Anti-globalisation protesters currently gathered outside the G8 summit at the Gleneagles Hotel in Scotland will be branded as "terrorists" and dealt with accordingly.
Fomenting and exploiting fear has been a speciality of the Blair regime. Asylum seekers, teenagers wearing hoods, militant Muslims, anarchists, paedophiles the list of targets is lengthy and frighteningly flexible.
Whenever there is a need to distract people from the impact of the government's neo-liberal economic policies, from its failure to rebuild the public sector, from its misbegotten foreign adventures, a new scapegoat is conjured up.
The bomb blasts may aid this process, but there is also reason to hope that this time there will be substantial public resistance.
On 15th February 2003, some two million people gathered in London to demonstrate against the imminent attack on Iraq.
I remember speaking to a neighbour who told me proudly that he was going on the march his first ever protest march because he was damned if he was going to let Tony Blair endanger his children's lives by making London a prime target for attack.
Everything that has happened since then the exposure of lie after lie, the deaths of British soldiers, the refusal of ground realities in Iraq to conform to Blair's scenario - has further entrenched popular resentment of the war, widely seen as a result of Blair's determination to court favour with George Bush.
The prime minister calculates that the bomb blasts will unite British people behind their government and that a touch of well-rehearsed statesman-like gravitas will refresh his image. Much of the media will pump out the message that we are all under threat from faceless barbarians irrationally opposed to "our way of life".
It will be up to the anti-war movement to articulate a different analysis, to remind people that this attack is a consequence of our role in dishing out brutality in Afghanistan, Iraq and Palestine, and to insist that no amount of moralistic posturing by our leaders can substitute for a desperately needed change in policy.
thanks, Ed, for some sanity over the bombs in London. The mainstream media
has been hysterical. Even a lot of blogs are covering the story from the
same angle.
People killing innocent people... The words George Bush spoke without a
hint of irony. Bush and Blairs illegal and unecessary war is no longer just
killing troops overseas, it is no longer just the Iraqis who bare the
brunt. Those lies are now killing Brits on their way to work. The blame for
these killings lies not with the bogeyman 'Al Qaida'. They lie with their
Master - Blair.
Why does the United States and Britain need a change of policy? You stated
the following: "It's Up to the Anti-War Movement to Attack Blair - The Man
Responsible for British Barbarity in Iraq and Radical Islam's Response to
It." You believe George W and Tony Blair's cause to go to war in Iraq
produced Radical Islamists to bomb London. I submit Radical Islamists
would have bombed London regardless of the war in Iraq! Why did they bomb
my Nation on 9/11? We are fighting this global war on terror because it is
result of decades of rising violence against democracies. The United
States launched a war on terror because of the events on 9/11; however,
this is not the only reason we launched the war. I submit it was a
combination of events that led to the global war on terror. For example,
in October 1983 in Lebanon, an Islamic extremist drove a bomb-filled truck
into a marine barracks, killing 241 Americas. A decade later, the World
Trade Center was bombed the first time by terrorist. Again, while
President Clinton was in office, the United States was attacked. In August
1998, the American embassies in Africa were attacked, killing 12 Americans
and more than 250 Africans. Less than a year before the 9/11 attacks, the
attacks on the USS Cole killed 17 soldiers and injured 39. This evidence
clearly supports my argument that it was a combination of events that led
to the global war on terror. We must fight back. In closing, my prayers go
out to your country.
Whilst Terry makes some valid observations on the multitude of "terrorist"
incidents upon the USA, I cannot help but goggle at the selective blindness
employed by a large portion of americans. While my sympathies go out to all
victims of terrorism, the simple fact is that elements of both the US and
the UK goverments have, over many years, killed, tortured, bombed and
generally made life miserable for many millions of people. And while many
(if not most) of these acts of violence have been cleverly hidden from the
view of the general populace, to ignore them and imagine that one's own
country is blameless and undeserving of retaliation seems to me a hallmark
of America's collective failure to grow beyond their own self serving needs
and desires. With the current hysteria surrounding the London bombings, it
is my hope that the people of the UK will not allow their liberties to be
further eroded, and instead consider how many in other countries have
suffered at the hands of their leaders. I'm quite sure it's a good few more
than the London bombings and World Trade Towers put together.
A Modest Proposal: The Roots Of Terrorism Are Terrorists.
Re: A Modest Proposal: The Roots Of Terrorism Are Terrorists
Notes About The Overnice
Thanks Terry. And right back at you.
To Ryan McGreal:
This whole incidence sounds too well oiled.
There is no way that a bunch of teenagers can even conspired to commit or
even execute such devious acts.
I believe Mr O'Neill, obviously intelligent as he is, is suffering from the
symptoms of that growing Western virus 'pre-9/11 amnesia', whereby all that
is done by Western governments/corpocracies since the events of that day
can be justified by the same, and all that came before, all the colonial
terror that the West in general and the US & UK in particular have
inflicted upon the rest of the world, counts for nothing.
Dear Mark Une:
First U.S. Aircraft Hijacked, May 1, 1961: Puerto Rican born Antuilo Ramierez Ortiz forced at gunpoint a National Airlines plane to fly to Havana, Cuba, where he was given asylum.
Goodbye edstrong.blog-city.com. It was fun while it lasted.
Point taken Jeff... there's been a lot of this terrorism about. Some of it
by idealogical fanatics, some of it by religious loonies, some of it by
groups funded by the CIA and some of it by people with a genuine grievance
whose cause was just but methods were questionable.
John O'Neill writes: "So…the root cause of terrorism is fighting against
it?" He must be demonstrating his recognition of the straw man fallacy
here, because that's not what I said. I don't believe the London train
bombs were a legitimate response to Western atrocities abroad, any more
than I believe the September 11, 2001 airplane attacks were a legitimate
response. In fact, I made a point of arguing that violent atrocities are
unjustifiable.
I said I wouldn't post anymore. Cher said she'd bloody well retire. Oh
well.
Hey! Mars to Venus: Back the fuck off.
Dear Ed Strong:
The attacks will not stop until we close our borders stay in our own
countries and everyone stays put until we can seek out those guilty.
THEN we can go back to what we were doing. This is just a thought but it
might could help.
I've apparently touched a nerve.
Don't you realize that I'm the only fucker that reads your shit? And the
worst thing is that if anyone in Hamilton fucks with you the first thing
the cops will do is come knocking on my door.
Jeff, you're just a bombastic bully and you have a big stinky bum.
F*L*B*P (for Venus McGreal)
Jeff, you're a mysogynist because you called me a cunt.
Gynocognition : Thinking like a cunt.
Dear Venus McGreal:
Dear Ed Strong readers:
Dear Ed Strong readers:
Well, Mr. O'Neologism.
Dear Venus McGreal:
Dear Venus McGreal:
Floater (for Venus McGreal)
american airline employee web
site[
for more info visit...american airline employee web site]